While this is a surface tram vehicle from Bordeaux, transit costs money anywhere. Question 7A would help the Denver metro area RTD fund transit services, vehicle needs, and infastructure.
At its simplest, Question 7A would ask voters to approve allowing the Denver metro area transit agency Regional Transportation District (RTD) to keep and use tax revenue collected in excess of a cap established under Colorado’s Taxpayer Bill Of Rights (TABOR).
If 7A passes, the TABOR override would last in perpetuity, unless a ballot measure saying otherwise passes in the future. This measure would only apply to RTD tax revenue technically subject to the TABOR cap, which is currently about $670 million, and yearly taxable economic activity would determine if revenue collection is above or below this TABOR cap.
Only voters in the RTD geographical area – basically parts or all of eight Denver metro area counties including all of Boulder County – will be able to vote on this measure, so it’s not statewide. The measure would pass with a simple majority.
Why Does TABOR Matter to RTD?
Question 7A will often be referred to as a “de-Brucing” measure, named after Taxpayer Bill of Rights (TABOR) author Douglas Bruce. De-Brucing measures have been very common, and hundreds of them have passed in local districts (city, county, special districts like RTD) since TABOR passed in 1992. Also, hundreds have failed.
In 1992, Colorado voters approved TABOR by a narrow margin, and this was after fairly similar measures failed in 1988 and 1990. In super-brief, it applies to all public taxing districts in the state, including cities, counties, special districts (fire, water, metro, library, transit, etc.), and of course the state government. Relevant tax revenue collections are allowed to grow at the rate of inflation and population growth, but any proposed increases beyond that must go to a vote of the people in the relevant district. If voters don’t approve de-Brucing measures, revenue in excess of the TABOR cap must be returned to taxpayers, which could happen directly (like sending refund checks) or by adjusting tax rates.
RTD has de-Bruced at least twice successfully, once from 1995-2005. Voters approved another measure in 1999 allowing RTD to keep and use TABOR excess revenues while it was financing light rail infrastructure (this was before FasTracks) “so long as the debt issued pursuant to the 1999 Ballot Question remains outstanding.” However, according to the RTD resolution putting 7A on the ballot, RTD is scheduled to pay off the 1999 debt in 2024, and at that point this de-Brucing authorization would terminate – hence 7A.
Shoppers in the RTD district pay a total of 1.0% sales tax on taxable purchases to RTD – a 0.6% general tax, and 0.4% for the FasTracks rail system approved in 2004. However, the FasTracks portion of the tax is actually de-Bruced until 2050.
The actual amount of money that RTD would be able to keep if 7A passes depends on economic performance (primarily sales tax revenue), along with the inflation and population growth allowances built into TABOR. Sales tax fluctuates, and for example, RTD had some rough years during the “Great Recession” of around 2008-2010 and the first few years of the pandemic. Readers who have lived in Colorado for a while probably remember that state TABOR refunds have ranged from nothing or next to nothing in some years, to the most recent years where people got reasonably large checks.
According to this Colorado Public Radio story, RTD estimated that it would have had to refund around $650 million total between 2007 and 2019 if it hadn’t de-Bruced, which would be an average of about $54 million per year if that meant 12 years, or about $50 million if it was 13 years. But according to this Longmont Times-Call story, RTD’s CFO provided estimates that RTD might need to refund $2.406 million district-wide in 2027 and $3.653 million in 2029 if 7C doesn’t pass.
How Would RTD Use the 7A Money?
The ballot measure language for 7A gives a general idea about how RTD would use any revenue it retains. In short, it would include providing services, infrastructure maintenance, and providing certain free or reduced fare rates. The language also says intended uses are “including, but not limited to” the items specified in the list below:
- Providing transportation choices to local residents by maintaining and growing current levels of bus and rail services;
- Repairing and improving rail lines, buses, bus stops and stations and other infrastructure to preserve the public’s investment in transit;
- Maintaining the availability of services for people with disabilities;
- Continuing to provide cleaner, more efficient methods of transportation other than driving on roads and highways; and
- Providing transportation services for youth 19 years or age or younger at reduced or no fares.
The full ballot measure resolution is available at this link: https://www.denvergov.org/files/assets/public/v/1/clerk-and-recorder/documents/elections/2024/ballot-measures/rtd-tabor.pdf
Quick Glance at 7A and RTD Numbers
According to the 2024 RTD budget document: “For FY2024, the operating expense budget is $856.2M and new capital is $32.4M for a total budget of $888.6M.” The document also said RTD anticipates just more than $1.2 million in revenue between taxes, grants, and fares, but about 20% of RTD’s expenditures will be for debt servicing.
For a brief sample of significant RTD statistics:
- Annual boardings for 2023 (bus, rail, Access-a-Ride): 65,175,290
- Service Area population: 3.09 million
- Total buses: 1,028
- Passenger bus stops: 9,720
- Total rail vehicles: 267
7A Pro
- 7A is not a new tax rate increase, and RTD has already had “de-Brucing” since 1995 and until the present.
- RTD has a great deal of needs for maintenance, infrastructure, service levels, and personnel, and money from 7A would help to some extent.
- Good transit can reduce personal Vehicle Miles Traveled, keep some vehicles off the road, and reduce personal use of fuels. Transit can also be essential for people who can’t or won’t drive.
7A Con
- Certain people in the district could really use even a small TABOR refund.
- Some people will call it a tax increase even if rates don’t change, because taxpayers wouldn’t get refunds or adjustments under TABOR.
- Some residents of the district don’t use RTD or criticize the agency for various reasons, and might rather get a refund than approve of RTD keeping the money.
Richard’s Take
Vote YES. I might look at this with a much more critical eye if this ballot measure was actually a new tax rate increase, but it’s not, even if people want to message it that way. The reality is that the ballot measure would simply allow RTD to keep and use tax revenue that people have already paid. Whatever anyone might think about RTD, it has real financial needs for really important things for those who care about transit, including vehicles, maintenance, vehicle operators, fuel, insurance, management and support staff, security, communications, and more.
Full disclosure – I served for six years on RTD’s Citizen Advisory Committee, but I was not paid and the experience did not leave me in complete agreement with everything RTD does. However, it did give me appreciation for the immense operation that RTD is – in brief, it’s a gigantic geographic district with countless bus and train lines – and maybe I’m only speaking for myself but I’m not looking for a TABOR refund from a (debatably) underfunded agency like RTD.
RTD has its critics, and it’s had some bad press lately for issues including the firing of its police chief and public messaging about that matter, and the low speeds of certain light rail lines. But it’s not exciting news to report that RTD still gets millions of people to and from their destinations, and readers (even certain state legislators) critical of management might find this story from Colorado Newsline interesting, because it shows RTD competing very favorably with transit agencies in peer U.S. cities on cost per mile for both bus service and rail service.
I feel fairly safe saying that most ordinary transit users want a few basic things out of their system – reliable service with good frequencies, dependable vehicles, quality infrastructure, safety, and cleanliness. This all takes money, and money has been a problem for RTD through the rough years. I’m personally pretty devoted to transit, but stopped riding at the start of the pandemic when most of us really didn’t know what was going on and people were dying or getting very sick from COVID. In the early years of the pandemic, RTD lost both tax revenue and ridership, and part of the reason I’ll be supporting 7A is because it will be good for actual system users if RTD can catch up a bit from the lean years.
Count me in among the people who are disappointed about not getting Northwest Rail service along US 36 and to Longmont yet, but that won’t make me vote against 7A and I hope Boulder-area readers don’t either. I’ve still used lots and lots of RTD services throughout the district since FasTracks passed in 2004 – to ski at Eldora, to commute from Boulder to Denver for work, for local transit like the SKIP in Boulder, to DIA, to games and events – and I know fairly well what it takes to run such a large agency. Transit is important for people who don’t want to drive, people who can’t drive, and for people who want to take cars off the road. RTD provides affordable mobility for many Front Range residents and visitors (visitors also probably pay some sales tax), and while 7A might not always bring in a large amount of money every year, it will provide some help so RTD can better meet its missions.
